Abramoff scandal = Dems retake the House BEFORE the election

[Walt Starr]

Based upon everything I've read on this scandal, it looks to be the largest scandal in the history of the United States and will take down multiple Congresspersons. It looks like it'll affect both parties, but will only do minor damage to the Dems while devestating the GOP.

Right now in the House there are 232 Republicans and 201 Democrats. Estimates I've seen are that as many as 60 Congresspersons will be affected.

If true, this means that the Dems retake the House when the scandal breaks wide open.

[laylah]

1. From your keyboard

to our Higher Power (s) that be.

Jenn

[oldtime dfl_er]

2. I only know bits and pieces of this scandal

Can anyone point me to a comprehensive site? There appear to be so many tentacles and threads to this scandal, it's hard to keep everything straight.

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/658010

[babylonsister]

7. Here's a start:

http://www.jackinthehouse.org/

and here:

http://www.newsfromreality.com/abramoff/

[Lochloosa]

3. Man, I have heard 12 as the number

but I will take your word for the 60. I'm sure that your sources are much better than mine. :7

[librechik]

20. we need 14 to make a difference n/t

[unblock]

4. anybody got a breakout on the parties of the governors/districts?

anybody got a list of the affected congresscritters and the party leanings of the governors or districts who would be replacing them?

[Walt Starr]

5. Congresscritters are never appointed by governors, only Senators

There can be special elections, but it looks to me like the scandal will break at a point where there would be very few, if any, special elections to fill the slots.

That would mean as many as 100 seats in the House in play next November with the Democrats going into the election with control of the House.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

8. Thanks Walt

If tht many seats are in play and the scandals are like they are right now, there could be a wholesale removal of wingnuts.

[unblock]

12. so many of the 435 districts are overwhelmingly "safe"

so even if some incumbents are finished in washington, their replacement could still be banana republican.

in fact, one wonders if maybe "safe" districts are more likely to produce brazen bribe-takers?

[Walt Starr]

16. That doesn't matter

Because it will be months before there is a replacement.

[unblock]

21. you think we'll actually have enough vacant seats?

i would think the banana republicans would keep indicted congresscritters around if it means keeping the house.
at least until the election.

[eShirl]

6. wouldn't that depend on who appoints their replacements?

I would think many of the replacements would be appointed by Republican governors, and thus likely to be more Republicans.

[Walt Starr]

9. Senators have replacements appointed

Congresscritters don't. There are provisions for special elections in many states, but if this thing breaks like it looks like it's going to, there would not be enough time for the special elections before the general elections next November.

[Freddie Stubbs]

10. The problem is that most of these guys represent safe districts

Even if they resign, they are likely to be replaced by someone from the same party.

[Walt Starr]

15. Not before the election

As soon as 60 or so Congresscritters are indicted, the House changes hands. There will be no replacements for months, which means the Democrats control the House, the Committees, and the agenda, at least for a period of time.

[NJCher]

11. Carville on Today Show

Said only 7 this a.m.


Cher

[Lochloosa]

13. Carville and the Today Show

no comment....

[KharmaTrain]

14. It Depends On How Fast, How Deep, How Far

There's still a sentiment out there that everyone elses Congresscritter is the problem, not the local one. This is especially the case with Repugnicans. In '98, the Repugnicans allowed a convicted felon, Jay Kimm, to participate in the Clinton inquisition...he even came to vote with an ankle bracelet on. If it hadn't been for his conviction prior to the '98 elections, this dude probably would have been re-elected (even while under indictment).

While I expect Hurricane Abramoff (now on the Kharmatrain watch at a strong Catagory 3 scandal) will blow up at various times over the year, unless a specific Congresscritter is all but caught red-handed on film (ala Marion Berry), you'll see several, even under indictment, able not only to stand for re-election, but stand a very good chance of being re-elected. Even DeLay, despite those crappy poll numbers (which didn't mention a specific Democratic candidate's name) can't be written off nor even Conrad Burns. Don't count the indictments and/or convictions before they're hatched.

The scandal alone won't bring the Repugnicans down, it'll be the agregate of an electorate that's pissed off at the war, the economy and the culture of corruption that will be key issues. Democrats can't expect to "win by default"...lest whatever short term gains are made will be lost in 2008.

Happy New Year...

[Walt Starr]

17. If it's only 7, then this is a moot point

If it's 60, the House will change hands, at least for a time.

[helderheid]

19. I hope 60 is closer to the mark!

Thanks for this great AM news!

[KharmaTrain]

24. They Won't Go Without A Conviction...

DeLay is the blueprint. This scum knows he's guilty as sin but figured either he'll beat the wrap or slime around for as long as he can. I see the same in Ney and others...they'll stay on even if they're indicted and try to drag their trials past the election...buying as much time as they can. They'll run as the "accused" (and these guys will play victims like old ladies tied to railroad tracks) in a partisan witch-hunt...orchestrated by a big push by Faux and hate radio to paint these crooks as being attacked not because they're corrupt and inept, but because they're "conservative". If Democrats just sit back and hope Ronnie Earle or the Abramoff prosecutors will win them seats, it's addition by subtraction that won't add up to any substantial gain.

Each scandal has to be localized and exploited. People in Ney's district need to know how his sucking up to Abramoff actually cost his district jobs or resulted in higher health care or education or energy costs. The same goes for anyone else tainted by this bastard...this was the way the Repugnicans were able to hurt Democrats in '94 and we saw how rapid and profound that shift was.

The Senate isn't as much a problem as the Senate. As long as Frist remains clueless and conflicted, he's the best leader the Democrats could ask for. He can barely walk and chew gum now, yet control the agenda...plus as long as he thinks he could be preznit, he'll be even more feeble. The House is where the action always has been and will be. Taking control is the first step in bringing accountability back to this country. Imagine the nightmares of the wingnuts when they wake up and see John Conyers in charge of Judiciary! :popcorn:

[librechik]

18. from your lips to goddess' ear

we may have to do a lot of emergency business with the GOP screaming at us that there's no quorums and we're cheating!

Sweet! (revenge is)

[TheFarseer]

22. This is wishful thinking

I’d be very surprised if ANY congressmen are gone because of this by next election, let alone more than one or two. It’s probably wishful thinking to think a lot of incumbents will be voted out of office. People in Sugarland knew this could happen last year and still voted Delay against a strong democratic candidate. Even if the democrats found an equally strong candidate, they would have to flip 15% or so of voters away from Delay. I’m not sure I see it happening. I imagine it’s the same way in a lot of these districts. Of course it could make a difference in some more up for grabs districts or in races with an exceptionally strong democratic candidate – maybe just enough to regain control of the house, but I wouldn’t count on it.

We can’t win back the government by hoping the other guys screw up. They have a huge segment of the population that will vote for any vile creature and put up with anything they do as long as they want to stop abortion. Why can’t we find something to get people that fired up about us?

[jim3775]

23. Where did you get the 60 number from?

This story says four are being investigated.

I also think I remember the number 13 being used at talkingpointsmemo.com.